When they lose a legal case on statutory or rule interpretation, they do not accept the loss--they appeal, they evade, they distort, they stretch. Only strong rights-based limitations on them will succeed.

OICU-IOSCO's "Defi Working Group" is "led by staff from the SEC" what in the mother of all psyops is this?

it's very simple, they do not want DeFi to exist at all...they want to re-centralize and re-intermediate DeFI this is war

I believe people have a fundamental human right to transact peer to peer (including peer-to-system-to-peer). This does *not* have identical regulatory outcomes--b/c there are no intermediaries to regulate. The fact that some people created or benefit from the system does not make them intermediaries.

To retain control, the powers that be are shifting from regulation of "intermediaries" to regulation of "responsible persons" Who is a "responsible person"--whoever they say, and there must always be one, no matter what. So if a peer to peer system succeeds without being subject to onerous financial regulations (as in TornadoCash), they will simply deem certain persons "responsible" for this fact and punish them--in effect, out of pure wrath. We will have to fight this at every constitutional rights level and human rights level--there is no other way. Statutory interpretive arguments will not work, because we are dealing with people who do not respect the rule of law (while vocally claiming that they are enforcing the law). When they lose a legal case on statutory or rule interpretation, they do not accept the loss--they appeal, they evade, they distort, they stretch. Only strong rights-based limitations on them will succeed.

​

Gabriel Shapiro aka _gabrielShapir0 @ lex_node